From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
To: Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [md PATCH 02/18] md/raid1, raid10: don't recheck "Faulty" flag in read-balance.
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 16:19:52 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160602061952.2939.41358.stgit@noble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160602061319.2939.72280.stgit@noble>
Re-checking the faulty flag here brings no value.
The comment about "risk" refers to the risk that the device could
be in the process of being removed by ->hot_remove_disk().
However providing that the ->nr_pending count is incremented inside
an rcu_read_locked() region, there is no risk of that happening.
This is because the rdev pointer (in the personalities array) is set
to NULL before synchronize_rcu(), and ->nr_pending is tested
afterwards. If the rcu_read_locked region happens before the
synchronize_rcu(), the test will see that nr_pending has been incremented.
If it happens afterwards, the rdev pointer will be NULL so there is nothing
to increment.
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
---
drivers/md/raid1.c | 7 -------
drivers/md/raid10.c | 8 --------
2 files changed, 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/md/raid1.c b/drivers/md/raid1.c
index c7c8cde0ab21..a54edbe741ff 100644
--- a/drivers/md/raid1.c
+++ b/drivers/md/raid1.c
@@ -689,13 +689,6 @@ static int read_balance(struct r1conf *conf, struct r1bio *r1_bio, int *max_sect
if (!rdev)
goto retry;
atomic_inc(&rdev->nr_pending);
- if (test_bit(Faulty, &rdev->flags)) {
- /* cannot risk returning a device that failed
- * before we inc'ed nr_pending
- */
- rdev_dec_pending(rdev, conf->mddev);
- goto retry;
- }
sectors = best_good_sectors;
if (conf->mirrors[best_disk].next_seq_sect != this_sector)
diff --git a/drivers/md/raid10.c b/drivers/md/raid10.c
index c7de2a53e625..cc9e3813e1a4 100644
--- a/drivers/md/raid10.c
+++ b/drivers/md/raid10.c
@@ -707,7 +707,6 @@ static struct md_rdev *read_balance(struct r10conf *conf,
raid10_find_phys(conf, r10_bio);
rcu_read_lock();
-retry:
sectors = r10_bio->sectors;
best_slot = -1;
best_rdev = NULL;
@@ -804,13 +803,6 @@ retry:
if (slot >= 0) {
atomic_inc(&rdev->nr_pending);
- if (test_bit(Faulty, &rdev->flags)) {
- /* Cannot risk returning a device that failed
- * before we inc'ed nr_pending
- */
- rdev_dec_pending(rdev, conf->mddev);
- goto retry;
- }
r10_bio->read_slot = slot;
} else
rdev = NULL;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-02 6:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-02 6:19 [md PATCH 00/18] Assorted minor fixes, particularly RCU protection NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 08/18] md/raid10: simplify print_conf a little NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 15/18] md/raid5: add rcu protection to rdev accesses in raid5_status NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 03/18] md/raid10: fix refounct imbalance when resyncing an array with a replacement device NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 09/18] md/raid10: stop print_conf from being too verbose NeilBrown
2016-06-02 18:47 ` John Stoffel
2016-06-02 22:48 ` NeilBrown
2016-06-03 22:39 ` Shaohua Li
2016-06-10 6:47 ` NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 05/18] md/raid10: add rcu protection to rdev access in raid10_sync_request NeilBrown
2016-06-03 22:33 ` Shaohua Li
2016-06-10 6:46 ` NeilBrown
2016-06-10 16:22 ` Shaohua Li
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 07/18] md/raid10: minor code improvement in fix_read_error() NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 11/18] md/raid1: small code cleanup in end_sync_write NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 13/18] md/raid5: add rcu protection to rdev accesses in handle_failed_sync NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 01/18] md: disconnect device from personality before trying to remove it NeilBrown
2016-06-03 22:31 ` Shaohua Li
2016-06-10 6:40 ` NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 10/18] md/raid1: small cleanup in raid1_end_read/write_request NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 12/18] md/raid1: add rcu protection to rdev in fix_read_error NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 14/18] md/raid5: add rcu protection to rdev accesses in want_replace NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 06/18] md/raid10: add rcu protection to rdev access during reshape NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` NeilBrown [this message]
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 16/18] md/multipath: add rcu protection to rdev access in multipath_status NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 04/18] md/raid10: add rcu protection in raid10_status NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 18/18] md: reduce the number of synchronize_rcu() calls when multiple devices fail NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 17/18] md: be extra careful not to take a reference to a Faulty device NeilBrown
2016-06-03 22:28 ` [md PATCH 00/18] Assorted minor fixes, particularly RCU protection Shaohua Li
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160602061952.2939.41358.stgit@noble \
--to=neilb@suse.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shli@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.